8 things the U.S. election system could learn from Mexico's (CNN)

[Warfish]

8 things the U.S. election system could learn from Mexico's


Editor's note: Robert A. Pastor is professor and co-director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University and author of "The North American Idea: A Vision of a Continental Future." The views expressed in this article are solely those of Robert A. Pastor.

By Robert A. Pastor, Special to CNN

The main question asked about the Mexican presidential elections on July 1 is whether victory by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) means that Mexico will return to its authoritarian past.

The answer is simple: The PRI has changed because Mexico has changed. For more than six decades, the PRI manipulated elections and ruled Mexico in a quasi-authoritarian system. However, between 1988 until 2000, two Mexican presidents – Carlos Salinas de Gortari and Ernesto Zedillo – gradually responded to internal and external pressures and opened the economy and the political system.

I have observed elections in Mexico since 1986 and witnessed the transformation of the election system from the worst to the best in the Americas. The projected victory by PRI candidate Enrique Peña Nieto will not turn Mexico backwards. Mexicans have chosen democracy, and after two terms under PAN presidents, they are voting for change.

Indeed, in this year when the United States is engaged in a ferocious campaign for the presidency, the question that ought to be asked is: How does the U.S. electoral system compare to Mexico's? I undertook a comprehensive study of the electoral systems in North America, and the good news is that the United States came in third. The bad news is that there are only three countries in North America.

In fact, the Mexican electoral system is much fairer, professional, independent and non-partisan than the U.S. system on all eight criteria for assessing election administration:

1. Nonpartisan election administration. Mexico's Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) is a nonpartisan, professional institution in which political party representatives have access but no control. IFE manages a nation-wide system with uniform rules. In contrast, the United States has 13,000 counties and municipalities that manage our national elections with different rules and less capacity. Partisan officials generally control the process, and in a close election, the opposition is often suspicious of the result.

Follow the Mexican election coverage in Spanish at CNNMéxico.com

2. Registration and identification of voters. IFE actively registers about 95% of 77 million eligible voters and gives each a biometric, photo ID card, which Mexicans use as a primary identification. The registration list is audited regularly, and the photos of the voters are on the list in each polling site.

In contrast, U.S. states and communities passively register about 55% of eligible voters, and the lists are flawed with many duplicates and errors, especially between states and counties. Each state has different rules, and in states where Republicans have a majority, their focus on preventing electoral fraud has led them to restrict registration and require IDs, while Democrats are more concerned about voters' access and believe the Republican ID laws are aimed to suppress voter turnout from poor people or minorities. The truth is that we ought to adopt Mexico's national, biometric ID system. That would eliminate duplicates and simplify the registration and voting process.

Related: Voter ID laws: Discrimination or 'no big deal'?

3. Poll workers. Mexico views the conduct of elections like Americans view jury duty – a civic obligation – and they recruit on a random basis a large number of people from each district. They are well-trained in every stage of the electoral process. When I asked a U.S. election official about the criteria for choosing poll workers, he said: "I'll take anyone with a pulse." Most poll workers are very senior citizens without the kind of stamina necessary to manage a polling station for 12 hours, and in most cases, they are poorly trained as compared to their Mexican counterparts.

4. Campaign finance/corruption. Each of Mexico's main political parties receive approximately $24 million of public financing for a three-month campaign. They can also receive 10% of their funds from supporters, but no one can give more than $71,000. In contrast, in the United States, there will be an estimated $6 billion raised privately, and with the Citizens United Supreme Court decision, corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money. Major contributors could have extraordinary access and substantial influence over public policy. Some would define that as corruption on a scale that even the drug cartels couldn't compete.

5. Equitable access to the media/negative advertising. IFE pays for media advertising, and ensures that the candidates have equal access. IFE also tries to discourage any negative advertising. A substantial amount of the $6 billion raised by the candidates in the United States goes for media advertising, and a recent study showed that 70 percent of ads in this year’s presidential contest has been negative. Just think what $6 billion could do as an endowment to a university; it would have lasting positive effects. Who believes that negative advertising can have a lasting positive effect?

6. Neutralizing incumbency. Since its revolution, Mexico's constitution prohibits re-election in order to prevent incumbents from using government to manipulate the electoral process. IFE goes even further by trying to prevent the president from even campaigning in the most indirect way for his party's candidates. In the United States, incumbents have a huge advantage in fund-raising because special interests can contribute to members of Congress while they are writing laws.

7. Judging disputes. Mexico has minutely-detailed election laws, and a professional and independent Electoral Tribunal to judge election disputes. The United States has few laws and no court with the expertise to settle such disputes.

8. Observers. Mexico invites international polling observers while the U.S. government does not welcome any international observers, and only two states allow them.

It was partly because of decades of electoral fraud that the Mexican people decided to construct a completely professional, independent and nonpartisan election organization. This has not eliminated all problems, but as compared to the thousands of complaints received by U.S. election authorities, the concerns from Mexico are minor.

A measure of commitment is that Mexico's IFE spends roughly 10 times more per capita than the United States to manage a state-of-the-art electoral process. The U.S. system is so antiquated, decentralized, dysfunctional, under-funded with public resources, and over-funded with private interest money that it behooves us Americans to stop asking whether the PRI is a return to the past in Mexico and to start asking why can't our electoral system be as good as Mexico's.

The U.S. could and the U.S. should establish an independent national nonpartisan election administration with a national biometric ID, a single national (or inter-operable) registration list, restrictions on private funding, public financing for short campaigns, poll workers that are recruited by lot and well-trained, disincentives for negative advertising, independent electoral courts, and international and domestic observers. There is much work for us to do before we can catch up to Mexico.

- The views expressed in this article are solely those of Robert A. Pastor.

Interesting opinion.

[AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite]

#2 is chock full of lolz...

[JetPotato]

I've said much of this numerous times on this site, as I've seen it all up close and personal working at the polls with BOE officials for years.

It is an absolute embarrassment the way we function in elections. The lack of consistency, technology, organization makes us look as if we live in the Stone Age.

A complete and utter disgrace.

[cr726]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

I've said much of this numerous times on this site, as I've seen it all up close and personal working at the polls with BOE officials for years.

It is an absolute embarrassment the way we function in elections. The lack of consistency, technology, organization makes us look as if we live in the Stone Age.

A complete and utter disgrace.

Would you be for a federal program to update and install national voters cards?

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by cr726

Would you be for a federal program to update and install national voters cards?

Absolutely, granted to all citizens, a photo ID card to be used for voting and other purposes. And invalidated as soon as you are added to the national death registry.

Minimal cost that could come out of the national sales tax I would enact right after I repealed corporate and income taxes. But that's another story.

[cr726]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Absolutely, granted to all citizens, a photo ID card to be used for voting and other purposes. And invalidated as soon as you are added to the national death registry.

Minimal cost that could come out of the national sales tax I would enact right after I repealed corporate and income taxes. But that's another story.

I would like to see it happen as well

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Absolutely, granted to all citizens, a photo ID card to be used for voting and other purposes. And invalidated as soon as you are added to the national death registry.

Minimal cost that could come out of the national sales tax I would enact right after I repealed corporate and income taxes. But that's another story.

Ha ha.

+1

[brady's a catcher]

Originally Posted by cr726

I would like to see it happen as well

Your comrades will NOT be happy to hear that.

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by brady's a catcher

Your comrades will NOT be happy to hear that.

This would garner overwhelming public support. But don't hold your breath waiting for someone to actually formalize it into a bill.

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by cr726

Would you be for a federal program to update and install national voters cards?

I feel like taking all the "lawmakers" who argue for national ID cards and say "HEY F*CKWADS. WTF is my driver's license? I had to show 6 forms of ID to get it...now it's not good enough?"...

but that would just be mean.


But then again...most political "ideas" are just more layers of bureaucracy and more paperwork. LOLZ!!

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

I feel like taking all the "lawmakers" who argue for national ID cards and say "HEY F*CKWADS. WTF is my driver's license?

A State-Issued ID designed for use in Driving.

A National Identification/Voter Card is similar, but not the same.

For example, you can't use it to drive. But non-drivers would still get/have one.

And it's Federal.

Not State.

Just say'in.

[cr726]

Originally Posted by brady's a catcher

Your comrades will NOT be happy to hear that.

You MF'er!!!!!

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by Warfish

A State-Issued ID designed for use in Driving.

A National Identification/Voter Card is similar, but not the same.

For example, you can't use it to drive. But non-drivers would still get/have one.

And it's Federal.

Not State.

Just say'in.

So make them both the freaking same.


And f*ck "states rights". So tired of hearing that. It's not 1886. it's 2012.

We aren't driving wagons across the frontier.

The world is small.

The last time we had a "contested" election wasn't because of people voting as Donald Duck. It was because some backward a** state decided to use punch cards in lieu of modern technology.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

And f*ck "states rights". So tired of hearing that. It's not 1886. it's 2012.

You and SafetyBlitz make a great couple.

[PlumberKhan]

Originally Posted by Warfish

You and SafetyBlitz make a great couple.

Why stop at states?

If states rights are so great...why not county rights? And then town rights? And then street rights?

States rights worked when the world was larger....when it took 6 months to cross the plains in a Conestoga wagon.

It's 2012.

[moninghaly]

what a long composition i've ever read .great . i agree.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

Why stop at states?

If states rights are so great...why not county rights? And then town rights? And then street rights?

States rights worked when the world was larger....when it took 6 months to cross the plains in a Conestoga wagon.

It's 2012.

Love you bro, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

States Rights had nothing to do with travel time.

But if it makes you feel better to wargarbl that States Rights are bad, have fun with that.

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by cr726

Would you be for a federal program to update and install national voters cards?

Elections are NOT federal. They are state activities at most.
States designate the president and members of the House and Senate. It is a state repsonsibility. Some states are trying to estblish voter ID.
This administration i against it because most of the voter fraud is from minorities and soon to be illegals.
Documented: one county (Democratic) in SC here had more votes than registered voters. HMMM. People were being transported to the polls by their (dare I say it) black ministers.

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by PlumberKhan

Why stop at states?

If states rights are so great...why not county rights? And then town rights? And then street rights?

States rights worked when the world was larger....when it took 6 months to cross the plains in a Conestoga wagon.

It's 2012.

There are county rights. Many counties have elected officials. Collect taxes etc.
And town rights. NJ is VERY big on 'home rule".
Street rights? Absolutely - see George Zimmerman, right?
for the record, the Constitution established states right. Just saying.

[cr726]

Originally Posted by palmetto defender

Elections are NOT federal. They are state activities at most.
States designate the president and members of the House and Senate. It is a state repsonsibility. Some states are trying to estblish voter ID.
This administration i against it because most of the voter fraud is from minorities and soon to be illegals.
Documented: one county (Democratic) in SC here had more votes than registered voters. HMMM. People were being transported to the polls by their (dare I say it) black ministers.

Good lord you can't help yourself. Lecture someone who cares about what you think.